The Karnataka High Court has modified a visitation order in an ongoing custody battle, eliminating a court-mandated per-visit payment required of a father while cautioning the mother that her failure to comply with visitation schedules could adversely impact her permanent custody claim.
In an order passed on July 24, Justice P. Shree Sudha set aside a lower court directive that required the father to pay Rs 5,000 per visit to the mother for conveyance and related expenses. The High Court determined that because the mother had herself requested moving the meeting location from a coffee shop to the family court’s designated visitation room, she was not entitled to transportation reimbursement.
Revised Visitation Rules and Grandparent Restriction
While the High Court rejected the father’s request for unsupervised interim access to his four-year-old son, it confirmed the existing schedule established by the lower court. Under the confirmed arrangement, the father is permitted supervised visitation on the first and third Saturdays of every month in the family court visitation room, as well as a scheduled meeting on the child’s birthday.
To ensure uninterrupted bonding, the High Court ordered that grandparents from both sides are barred from attending these sessions. The bench noted that excluding extended family members would allow the father and son to spend quality time together without unnecessary interference.
Mother’s Conduct to Impact Final Custody Decision
The High Court drew attention to evidence submitted by the father indicating a pattern of non-compliance by the mother. Records showed that despite living only 1.75 kilometers apart, the mother repeatedly failed to bring the child to scheduled meetings without providing advance notice.
The court observed that the mother displayed reluctance to facilitate contact between the father and child, noting that she sought to alter visitation terms shortly after prior orders were issued. The bench explicitly warned that her persistent non-cooperation and failure to adhere to court directions would be taken into account during the final adjudication of the pending custody petition.
Background of the Dispute
The legal conflict originated after the couple separated. According to advocate Rashmi George, representing the father, the mother left the matrimonial home with the child on June 30, 2022, without explanation, prompting the father to file for permanent custody before the Family Court in Bengaluru.
During the pendency of the divorce and custody proceedings, the father sought interim unsupervised access on weekends. He alleged that during previous supervised visits, the mother arrived late, brought her parents along, and hindered free interaction, which he claimed negatively affected the child’s mental well-being.
The mother opposed the father’s plea, arguing that the child became distressed and wept during long visits. She also alleged that the father was negligent in raising the child and had failed to pay maintenance.
The Bengaluru Family Court subsequently limited visitation to twice a month and birthdays under supervision while imposing the Rs 5,000 per-visit charge, prompting the father to challenge those specific terms before the High Court.
